Bosco has been joined here by a fellow infallibilist – that is one who believes that his own, personal interpretation of Scripture is infallible. They both tell us that bowing is an act of worship, and when told that it is an act of veneration, insist it is an act of worship. This is not, one suspects, the best way to argue their point; insisting one is right without an argument other than ‘bowing is worship’ rather cuts off the possibility of dialogue.

But let us turn to Scripture for guidance. Let me take a few examples.

4 And it happened, as they were greatly[a] perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments. 5 Then, as they were afraid and bowed their faces to the earth, they said to them, “Why do you seek the living among the dead?

We see here an act of veneration, not worship. If Bosco and his friend are correct, we should expect to find the Apostles being rebuked for worshipping the angels; that bit is not in my Bible; perhaps it is only in the iconoclast’s Bible? Is this an isolated example? Perhaps it is OK because they are angels? Let us see what happens in Acts 21:29-31 when Silas and Paul are released from jail by the earthquake:

29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”

Do Paul and Silas say that Bosco and his friend say – bowing is worship, you must not bow to us? No, they don’t.In the world outside that of the iconoclast with an anti-Catholic prejudice, bowing is form of veneration often practiced. On the two occasions I have been fortunate enough to be introduced to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, I have bowed to her; I was not worshipping her, and she certainly did not suppose I was. Indeed, I was following the example of those who bowed to King David in 1 Chronicles 29:20.

There is a very clear distinction between worship and veneration. When, in Acts 10:25-26 , Cornelius falls before Peter, Peter tells him to get up because he, Peter, is just a man – and the word used, proskuneo is not the same used when bowing means veneration. But then being a monoglot born-again American means you don’t read the Greek and don’t know these things, and being infallible in your interpretation of Scripture, who needs to know such things?

What do we see in the OT with the Ark of the Covenant? Let me quote:

Joshua 7:6-7 Then Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon his face before the ark of the LORD until the evening, he and the elders of Israel; and they put dust upon their heads. [7] And Joshua said,“Alas, O Lord GOD, why hast thou brought this people over the Jordan at all, to give us into the hands of the Amorites, to destroy us? Would that we had been content to dwell beyond the Jordan!”

So there we have it, in sharp contrast to the injunction of Bosco and his friend, we have the Irsaelities bowing to an ark, the work of human hands, inanimate, containing on it images of two cherubs with outstretched wings. The Temple itself, the holiest place of worship, contained images according to the accounts in Exodus and Chronicles. This all sounds much more like the inside of a Catholic Church than an Evangelical chapel.

So, from Scripture itself, by sola scriptura if you will, the myth peddled by Bosco and his friend is rebutted.

What, then, is going on here? In part it is the result of centuries of State-sponsored anti-Catholic propaganda; tell people a lie often enough, especially at the risk of going to jail or being burned, and it is wonderful what people can be persuaded to believe. On top of that, there has been a long tradition in Christianity of iconoclasm, of which this Evangelical obsession is a sub-set. It led to acts of destruction matching that of ISIS in Syria and Iraq. All of this has been explained to Bosco many times, but it does not matter. Bosco, like his friend, say they have been born again and the spirit in them tells them all they need to know. Having been accused of lying by Bosco’s friend, I do not accuse them of the same, I simply ask prayerfully, that they might consider the origin of a spirit which wilfully guides them to tell untruths about Catholics.

In an era when we are sensitive to most forms of prejudice, it seems that this anti-Catholic bigotry is an ignoble exception. Satan attacks what he fears most, and he never lacks for humans foolish enough to fall for his wiles. You might, at the end of this, ask why I bother to allow such people to post here? This post is the answer. It is the duty of every believing Catholic to explain to these misguided people that they are misguided. Will they be convinced? Bosco has been here for five years repeating his sad litany and convincing no-one, so it is unlikely. But with the Lord, all things are possible, and if he and his chum are not convinced, I know there are others here, genuine seekers, who will be helped by this. God be with them, and with Bosco and his friend.

Post navigation

34 thoughts on “Anti-Catholicism: the last acceptable prejudice?”

Indeed, although you could just as well say either catholic or Christian as Catholic. For truly these self-untaught souls no more represent most of us that they do you. Often we allow you to take point on these because you have greater patience, and better knowledge than we have. But it is rather funny, one of the reasons for that is that I (at least) live in culture where this is still a respected and understood motif.

Maybe it’s just us, but being close to the land seems to effect us as it always has, making objectively true things still true. But it also means that we don’t get a lot of practice defending the Faith.

Is a human the same as a wood or stone statue?
I get this from each and every catholic person, that since people in the bible bowed befor other people, then its OK and fine and dandy to bow down befor the words of their hands.
Then the same argument that someone bowed befor the Ark I good reason to bow befor images of humans.
The Ark had God sitting on it. It was kept in a place called The Holy of Holies.
Most cultures bow as a greeting. The greeting is to a live human. The catholic uses the weak reasoning that there is no difference between a piece of stone and a human. They continually claim that bowing befor their queen isn’t worship, and this claim extends to inanimate objects.
Try to find anywhere in scripture where we are instructed to bow befor the works of our hands.
I can find millions of passages where we are told not to do this.
God had an Ark made and he dwelled on it.
God told us not to make for OURSELFS any graven image. This doesn’t sit well with those who love their images. We are told by these catholics that we don’t read the scriptures properly. I guess if I read them properly I would come away thinking as good brother Nicholas does, that God commands us to make images. Jesus commands us to call holymen Father. jesus commands us to repeat rote formula prayers. Commit a sin? Repeat Hail mary 25 times to get rid of it.
Im told I don’t interpret scripture properly. Well, I take it at face value, and this seems to inflame those who hate what the bible says. I believe we are not to make images and not to bow to them OR serve them, eg, putting clothes and jewelry on them. Its what the 2nd commandment says. But if I was as smart as good brother Chalcedon is, id interpret it properly and see that it says God commands us to make images and serve then and get down on my knees befor them. I wonder how good brother got so smart? Was it intense study or was he born brilliant?

The ark had the tablets on which the commandments were sengraved on – graven images if ever there were any Bosco. No one except you just now have ever thought they were God! You’re on form today with one of the silliest comments ever.

Did you just not read this part of my post showing where the Israelities were commanded to do what you deny?

So there we have it, in sharp contrast to the injunction of Bosco and his friend, we have the Irsaelities bowing to an ark, the work of human hands, inanimate, containing on it images of two cherubs with outstretched wings. The Temple itself, the holiest place of worship, contained images according to the accounts in Exodus and Chronicles. This all sounds much more like the inside of a Catholic Church than an Evangelical chapel.

Would you please quote the passage where it says God lived in the ark?

I have provided you here with a dozen examples disproving your nonsense, and all you can do is repeat rubbish. You’re busted, and as ever, you repeat nonsense. Try getting an argument, and even better, repent, join God’s Church and get to know the real Jesus.

Would you please quote the passage where it says God lived in the ark? God lives in heaven but he hung out on the Ark.

And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.

22 And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.

Good brother Chalcedon, in his infinite catholic wisdom, called the tablets graven images. that’s indicative of his love for man made images. Silly ninny, God made those with his own fingers. There were no other images in the Holy of Holies. Good brother Chalcedon has suggested that there were many images, I suppose of men, inside the Holy of Holies. he likens it to a catholic church, full of images of men.
The Russians invented sliced bread, so they claim. Plus, good brother has the Israelites all bowing befor the Ark, which isn’t a crime….god was sitting above it. Only twice a yr a priest went in and did things, in contrast to good brothers claims. We see what idolaters do to their graven images. the foot of Jupiter is plumb worn down from hellbound idolaters kissing its foot, for centuries.

So, he did not ‘live’ in the ark as you claimed. If you follow the links I give in the blogpost you will find the Holy of Holy was decorated with images, and you will find the Israelites bowed to the ark and the images. You claim it was because ‘God lived there’ but then you admit he only ;hung out’ there, so did they only bow when they knew he was home? Was there a little red light showing ‘God’s home, it’s OK t bow’ and green one saying ‘God is not home, don’t bow’? You crack me up Bosco, you really do. You should try doing stand up.

yeah, I followed your link, which ive read a million times, thanks. cherubs seem to be gods house pets. he had them woven into some fabric. all this was a representation of the throne room that god instructed to be made. I think youll come up short when you look to find where god asked anyone to bow befor them. I feel so sorry for you. you just cant rest til you prove bowing berfor the works of our hands is what god demands us to do. its such a big part of your religion. your religious practices cant be wrong. must be the bible is wrong, or ,or, better yet, bosco is wrong…yeah, that’s the ticket….bosco is wrong. ahhhhh, that makes it all better.
there were trees and bulls carved into the walls of the temple, by gods decree. sorry catholics, you wont find accounts of idolaters bowing to them.
that’s not why you will wake up in hell. ou will wake up in hell because you trusted in an idolatrous empty hollow religion and some Babylonian queen to save you.

No, I am not saying God commands them, I am disproving your ignorant claim the bowing is the sane as worship. It isn’t and you know it. You have no arguments left, so you resort to tired old nonsense about pagan goddesses. You know the truth in your heart, but your understanding is darkened. You tell me I shall wake in hell, in turn I pray for you and for a calmer spirit in your breast.

I use the word “you” in a general sense. personally I expect YOU to wind up saved. I know most cathols don’t consider themselves worshiping the statue. Ive said this a billion times. Im driving home the point that its and old and forbidden act of idolatry. God is jealous, and he says so. he wants no knee to bow to a graven image. He doesn’t care whats in your mind. The commandment says not to worship them OR to bow to them. He covered both bases. the fact that bowing befor stone and wood by most of the devotees of the CC makes this an evil cult. the CC advises it, not just condones it. From the least all the way to the pope, you all bow befor images of stone and wood. I maintain this is idolatry and advise you and all to get out of it.
Jesus is at your door knocking.
I have done this to Jehovas and Mormons and other religions. Jesus offers a better way.

Your God seems rather stupid for an omniscient being, and I wonder why you bother worshipping this rather jealous and nasty godling you have extracted from the Bible. This omniscient Being who knows what is in our minds does not care, you say, he cares only about outward appearances you say? Could you explain why this nasty Being allowed His only Son to die on the Cross out of live for us? Your picture is incoherent.

No, being a follower of Jesus, I love truth, and on this subject you do not have the truth in you. Now read that article and see why everyone with an education is sad for you; it’s embarrassing watching you make an ass of yourself. What ever the reason you think you are here, the real reason is to get educated in the faith you profess.

Here’s a taste: ‘For example, Lester L. Grabbe has highlighted the fact that Hislop’s entire argument, particularly his association of Ninus with Nimrod, is based on a misunderstanding of historical Babylon and its religion.[1] Grabbe also criticizes Hislop for portraying the mythological queen Semiramis as Nimrod’s consort, despite the fact that she is never even mentioned in a single text associated with him,[1] and for portraying her as the “mother of harlots”, even though this is not how she is depicted in any of the texts where she is mentioned.’
And this out of date nonsense is the basis for your claims 😂 really, Bosco.

And to show the mad company you are keeping, and where you get this rot, try this:
‘Some fundamentalist Protestants still regard Hislop’s book as proof that the Roman Catholic Church is, in fact, the continuation of ancient Babylonian religion.[1] Jehovah’s Witnesses periodical The Watchtower frequently published excerpts from it until the 1980s.[15] The book’s thesis has also featured prominently in the conspiracy theories of racist groups such as The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord[16] and other fringe groups.[17] Author and conspiracy theorist David Icke incorporates Hislop’s claims about Semiramis into his book The Biggest Secret, claiming that Semiramis played a key role in the establishment of a global conspiracy run by Reptilian aliens, whom he asserts is secretly controlling humanity.[18]’

And this review expresses my feelings perfectly:
‘If it wasn’t for the unfortunate fact that this is supposed to be serious I would call it ‘Comic Genius’. I hadn’t laughed so much in ages. Some bits had me doubled on the floor in hysterics. When my wife asked what was wrong I showed her the passages and she was in fits of laughter too. Lets face it this book is not written by someone with any knowledge of either the Catholic Church or ‘Ancient Babylon’. It is an anti-Catholic polemic aimed at people who want to believe anything that is anti-Catholic. Catholicism was only legalised in Britain in 1829 & people like Hislop saw that as a bad thing. As far as inaccuracies go there are some howlers such as the cross or ‘T’ being the emblem of Tammuz despite the fact that the worshippers of Tammuz didn’t have a ‘T’ in their alphabet. In fact they didn’t have an alphabet, they used Cuneiform instead. The nonsense about the ‘fish hats’ of Dagon was so funny I cried tears.

I find it very sad that some people take all of Hislop’s far fetched claims seriously. It makes about as much sense as basing your knowledge of the French purely on what you’ve been told about them by the English (or vice versa) If you expect an unbiased or truthful opinion then you will be disappointed. By going to the original source, the French (or the English) you will get a clearer and more accurate understanding of the people; whether you decide to like them or not is up to you; the decision to dislike them hasn’t already been made for you. Ian Hislop, Jack Chick, Loraine Boettner, Paul Blanshard, Dan Brown or David Hunt won’t give you a truthful or unbiased knowledge of the Catholic Church. Truth does not suit their agendas. Lies do.’

Too bad I don’t know anything about Hilsop. never read any of his stuff. I get my ideas from archeology . The fish hats and pine cone staff are there for all to see. Plus, its spelled out in the bible that the religion on seven hills is mystery Babylon. Of course you want to vindicate your chosen religion. Calling me names doesn’t make the bent crooked cross your pope carries go away. Calling me names doesn’t make the fact that you Nimrod worshipers bow befor the works of your hands go away. If I was never born, you all are still idolaters. Not that we are not all guilty of idolatry, but your religion forces idolatry on you. Time to look for a new religion.

No, that is where you are wrong. If you can quote me one, just one single peer-reviewed archaeological paper which supports your line of argument I shall go away for ever. If you can’t, you should stop lying. All the nonsense derives from Hislop, even if you are too ignorant to know it. Read what your fellow Protestant, Woodrow wrote, He, at least, had a brain and integrity; it would be good if you had one.

"I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend." J.R.R. Tolkien <br>“I come not from Heaven, but from Essex.” William Morris